Based on a sample of 717 employees of Korean firms administered the Korean version of the NEO-PI-R, this study used confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to examine the construct validity of the five-factor model (FFM) of personality in Korea. CFA results indicated that the FFM fit the Korean data as well as it fit the U.S. normative data reported in the NEO-PI-R manual. Furthermore, the pattern of intercorrelations among the FFM dimensions in the Korean sample was similar to that in the U.S. normative data sample, with the only noteworthy difference being the hypothesized stronger relation between Agreeableness and Conscientiousness in the Korean sample. In neither sample was the FFM assumption of orthogonality supported. Study results support the hypothesis that the basic structure of personality is similar across cultures and indicate that the FFM can describe this common structure if the assumption of trait orthogonality is abandoned.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Amelang, M. , & Borkenau, P. (1982). The trait concept: Current theoretical considerations, empirical facts, and implications for personality inventory construction. In A. Angleitner & J. S. Wiggins (Eds.), Personality assessment via questionnaire (pp. 7-34). New York/Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
2.
Barrick, M. R. , & Mount, M. K. (1993). Autonomy as a moderator of the relationship between the Big Five personality dimensions and job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 111-118.
3.
Block, J. (1995). A contrarian view of the five-factor approach to personality description. Psychological Bulletin, 117, 187-215.
4.
Bond, M. H. (1979). Dimensions used in perceiving peers: Cross-cultural comparisons of Hong Kong, Japanese, American, and Filipino university students. International Journal of Psychology, 14, 47-56.
5.
Bond, M. H. (1994). Trait theory and cross-cultural studies of person perception. Psychological Inquiry, 5, 114-117.
6.
Bond, M. H. , Nakazato, H., & Shiraishi, D. (1975). Universality and distinctiveness in dimensions of Japanese person perception. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 6, 346-357.
7.
Botwin, M. D. , & Buss, D. M. (1989). Structure of act-report data: Is the five-factor model of personality recaptured?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 998-1001.
8.
Caprara, G. V. , Barbaranelli, C., & Livi, S. (1994). Mapping personality dimensions in the Big Five model. European Review of Applied Psychology, 44, 9-15.
9.
Chae, J. H. , Piedmont, R. L., Estadt, B. K., & Wicks, R. J. (1995). Personological evaluation of Clance’s impostor phenomenon scale in a Korean sample. Journal of Personality Assessment, 65, 468-485.
10.
Cheng, S. K. (1990). Understanding the culture and behavior of East Asians: A Confucian perspective. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 24, 510-515.
11.
Church, A. T. , & Burke, P. J. (1994). Exploratory and confirmatory tests of the Big Five and Tellegen’s three- and four-dimensional models. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 66, 93-114.
12.
Costa, P. T., Jr. , & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) and NEO Five-Factor Inventory (FFI) professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.
13.
Costa, P. T., Jr. , & McCrae, R. R. (1995a). Solid ground in the wetlands of personality: A reply to Block. Psychological Bulletin, 117, 216-220.
14.
Costa, P. T., Jr. , & McCrae, R. R. (1995b). Domains and facets: Hierarchical personality assessment using the revised NEO personality inventory. Journal of Personality Assessment, 64, 21-50.
15.
Costa, P. T., Jr. , McCrae, R. R., & Dye, D. A. (1991). Facet scales for Agreeableness and Conscientiousness: A revision of the NEO Personality Inventory. Personality and Individual Differences, 12, 887-898.
16.
Cudeck, R. (1989). Analysis of correlation matrices using covariance structure models. Psychological Bulletin, 105, 317-327.
17.
De Raad, B. (1992). The replicability of the Big Five personality dimensions in three word-classes of the Dutch language. European Journal of Personality, 6, 15-29.
18.
Digman, J. M. (1990). Personality structure: Emergence of the five-factor model. In M. R. Rosenzweig & L. W. Porter (Eds.), Annual review of psychology (Vol. 41, pp. 417-440). Palo Alto, CA: Annual Reviews.
19.
Digman, J. M. , & Takemoto-Chock, N. K. (1981). Factors in the natural language of personality: Re-analysis, comparison, and interpretation of six major studies. Multivariate Behavior Research, 16, 149-170.
20.
Fan, X. , Thompson, B., & Wang, L. (1999). Effects of sample size, estimation methods, and model specification on structural equation modeling fit indexes. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 56-83.
21.
Fiske, D. W. (1949). Consistency of the factorial structures of personality ratings from different sources. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 44, 329-344.
22.
Goldberg, L. R. (1992). The development of markets for the Big Five factor structure. Psychological Assessment, 4, 26-42.
23.
Guthrie, G. M. , & Bennett, A. B. (1971). Cultural differences in implicit personality theory. International Journal of Psychology, 6, 305-312.
24.
Heaven, P. C. L. , Connors, J., & Stones, C. R. (1994). Three or five personality dimensions? An analysis of natural language terms in two cultures. Personality and Individual Differences, 17, 181-189.
25.
Hu, L. T. , & Bentler, P. M. (1998). Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: Sensitivity to underparameterized model misspecification. Psychological Methods, 3, 424-453.
26.
Isaka, H. (1990). Factor analysis of trait terms in everyday Japanese language. Personality and Individual Differences, 11, 115-124.
27.
Jöreskog, K. G. , & Sörbom, D. (1993). LISREL 8 user’s reference guide. Chicago: Scientific Software.
28.
McCrae, R. R. (2001). 5 years of progress: A reply to Block. Journal of Research in Personality, 35, 108-113.
29.
McCrae, R. R. , & Costa, P. T., Jr. (1997). Personality trait structure as a human universal. American Psychologist, 52, 509-516.
30.
McCrae, R. R. , Costa, P. T., Jr., & Yik, M. S. M. (1996). Universal aspects of Chinese personality structure. In M. H. Bond (Ed.), Handbook of Chinese psychology (pp. 189-207). Hong Kong: Oxford University Press.
31.
McCrae, R. R. , Yik, M. S. M., Trapnell, P. D., Bond, M. H., & Paulhus, D. L. (1998). Interpreting personality profiles across cultures: Bilingual, acculturation, and peer rating studies of Chinese undergraduates. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 74, 1041-1055.
32.
McCrae, R. R. , Zonderman, A. B., Costa, P. T. Jr., Bond, M. H. & Paunonen, S. V. (1996). Evaluating replicability of factors in the Revised NEO Personality Inventory: Confirmatory factor analysis versus Procrustes rotation. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 70, 552-566.
33.
Mount, M. K. , & Barrick, M. R. (1995). The Big Five personality dimensions: Implications for research and practice in human resources management. In G. R. Ferris & K. M. Rowland (Eds.), Research in personnel and human resource management (Vol. 13, pp. 152-200). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
34.
Norman, W. T. (1963). Toward an adequate taxonomy of personality attributes: Replicated factor structure in peer nomination personality ratings. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 66, 574-583.
35.
Ones, D. S. (1993). The construct validity of integrity tests. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Iowa,
36.
Iowa City . Ostendorf, F. (1990). Language and personality structure: Toward the validation of the five-factor model of personality. Regensburg, Germany: S. Roderer Verlag.
37.
Parker, J. D. A. , Bagby, R. M., & Summerfeldt, L. J. (1993). Confirmatory factor analysis of the revised NEO personality inventory. Personality and Individual Differences, 15, 463-466.
38.
Paunonen, S. V. , Jackson, D. N., Trzebinski, J., & Forsterling, F. (1992). Personality structure across cultures: A multimethod evaluation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 447-456.
39.
Piedmont, R. L. , & Chae, J. H. (1997). Cross-cultural generalizability of the five-factor model of personality: Development and validation of the NEO-PI-R for Koreans. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 28, 131-155.
40.
Schmidt, F. L. (1996). Statistical significance testing and cumulative knowledge in psychology. Psychological Methods, 1, 115-129.
41.
Schmidt, F. L. , & Hunter, J. E. (1997). Eight common but false objections to the discontinuation of significance testing in the analysis of research data. In L. L. Harlow, S. A. Mulaik, & J. H. Steiger (Eds.), What if there were no significance tests? (pp. 37-64). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
42.
Schmidt, F. L. , Le, H., & Ilies, R. (2001). Beyond alpha: An empirical examination of the effects that different sources of measurement error have on reliability estimates for measures of individual differences constructs. Manuscript submitted for publication.
43.
Schmit, M. J. , & Ryan, A. M. (1993). The Big Five in personnel selection: Factor structure in applicant and nonapplicant populations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 966-974.
44.
Stumpf, H. (1993). The factor structure of the Personality Research Form: A cross-national evaluation. Journal of Personality, 61, 27-45.
45.
Tellegen, A. (1985). Structures of mood and personality and their relevance to assessing anxiety with an emphasis on self-report. In A. H. Tuma & J. D. Maser (Eds.), Anxiety and the anxiety disorders (pp. 681-706). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
46.
Yang, K. , & Bond, M. H. (1990). Exploring implicit personality theories with indigenous or imported constructs: The Chinese case. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 1087-1095.
47.
Yik, M. S. M. , & Bond, M. H. (1993). Exploring the dimensions of Chinese person perception with indigenous and imported constructs: Creating a culturally balanced scale. International Journal of Psychology, 28, 75-95.
